Protecting your brand.

[Alan Reynolds]

Anyone au fait with company brand protection? I have a friend who has a little business and they found that they could use a certain popular brand of product in their product. Upshot is the company somehow has found out that she’s using their production but not as originally intended. She doesn’t mention the products name but they have told her to stop using their product in her product or they will sue.

I suspect they are trying to bully her but I think we all know that these things can get very expensive.

Any ideas?

 

[gaz1]

it depends on what shes using as a product

if its a chair for reference shes bought online and then forwarded it as her products then they have every right to say stop using there products

you can make a chair the same style but does it have copyright as many chairs can be made the same way

the same can be said with a fertiliser mix using someones elses product and claiming it as there own

however you can have the same mix thats been made but has extra ingrediants within it

is it that companys, well no its not but its dosnt stop some companys trying it on with there claims

 

[James1979]

I would consult a brand lawyer or whatever they call themselves.

There was a thread a couple of years back asking about something similar. The guy followed the advice on here and lost out. Worst £300 he didn’t spend, apparently!

 

[AKN]

Tell your friend to contact The Law Society they have a service where you describe your problem and they recommend 3 local law firms who are accredited with experience in that area of law. We did this when we had a boundary dispute won hands down didn’t cost us that much but cost the opponent a fortune dealing with his family solicitor only to be told at the end to Give in.

 

[Dee J]

Out of context it's difficult to interpret... But if she's using a 'well known product (tm)' in a manner other than intended by the manufacturer, and any liability issue arises then that could hit that manufacturer on the basis that they'd, by default, permitted the situation. Equally if the reuse of the product impinges on their brand image, that too could be a real problem for them. Why persist?

 

[GRW]

Using a product - in another product, to create a 3rd new product.
If that was against Co policy and you Goulding be sued, then no-one would be able bake a cake, let alone anything else.
Lots of products get used for purposes other than theoriginal intended use all the time, and there is no issue.
I suspect, that the new product made in part by the inclusion of the product in question.... must be something that is in direct competition and aimed at the same market?
Or, the new product is something that the company sees as detrimental to their brand image, due to environmental or other contentious factors perhaps?
There has to be a specific reason (usually money or image, so they wish to protect their brand identity and perceived values) the Co objects to their product being mixed with other ingredients.

 

[Kram]

There are ways around it.
Lets say the product is a complete item with different versions. Your resold product uses the cheaper version and upgrades it to be better than the top version.

Worst case, they will copy Sony. A small grey import computer game shop got sued concurrently in multiple countries and it never got to court - as Sony intended, they were bankrupted by legal fees. Sony could afford it, an easy win.

 

[Alan Reynolds]

Using a product - in another product, to create a 3rd new product.
If that was against Co policy and you Goulding be sued, then no-one would be able bake a cake, let alone anything else.
Lots of products get used for purposes other than theoriginal intended use all the time, and there is no issue.
I suspect, that the new product made in part by the inclusion of the product in question.... must be something that is in direct competition and aimed at the same market?
Or, the new product is something that the company sees as detrimental to their brand image, due to environmental or other contentious factors perhaps?
There has to be a specific reason (usually money or image, so they wish to protect their brand identity and perceived values) the Co objects to their product being mixed with other ingredients.

Your close. Ok I’ll do a reveal. She makes something that includes A well known leading brand fabric conditioner. Although the finished product does not associate itself directly with the product at all. The brand is not named anywhere so Ihave no idea how they got wind of it.

We’ve found a better alternative by necessity but they’re still not happy.

 

[mike os]

Far to little detail for a meaningful answer beyond either stop using it or get proper legal advice

 

[Kram]

In my opinion, if your no longer using the product they have no basis to complain.

Even if you continue, I dont think there is a basis as repackaging products is *very* common, provided the labelling is correct and no names or claims are mentioned.

Can we see your (obfuscated if needed) packaging/advertising?

 

[gaz1]

note if you are sharing details share via pm only

 

[voipio]

Your close. Ok I’ll do a reveal. She makes something that includes A well known leading brand fabric conditioner. Although the finished product does not associate itself directly with the product at all. The brand is not named anywhere so Ihave no idea how they got wind of it.

We’ve found a better alternative by necessity but they’re still not happy.

I think this is common proactice. Big companies often look closely at other competing products i..e. have them examined by analytical chemists or other relevant experts, to see if there are any possible infringements.

 

[mangocrazy]

Your close. Ok I’ll do a reveal. She makes something that includes A well known leading brand fabric conditioner. Although the finished product does not associate itself directly with the product at all. The brand is not named anywhere so Ihave no idea how they got wind of it.

We’ve found a better alternative by necessity but they’re still not happy.

If you are now using an alternative and no longer use the Well Known Brand's product in any way, shape or form why not just send them a letter saying that you have entirely complied with their cease and desist request? What exactly do they want - blood?

 

[Alan Reynolds]

If you are now using an alternative and no longer use the Well Known Brand's product in any way, shape or form why not just send them a letter saying that you have entirely complied with their cease and desist request? What exactly do they want - blood?

I think we’ve sorted the problem now with the help of a manufacturer of fabric softeners whose product gets rebranded anyway. They’re quite willing to allow its use as at the end of the day, they’re making money. They will supply any quantity we need. Politely told they other lot to go do one and that we found a considerably cheaper AND as it turns out, much better product.
Thanks for the input, it did help.

 

[Pete.]

I think this is common proactice. Big companies often look closely at other competing products i..e. have them examined by analytical chemists or other relevant experts, to see if there are any possible infringements.

Would hardly need any kind of forensics if they mixed a bit of smart water-type substance into their product.

 

[Kram]

I think this is common proactice. Big companies often look closely at other competing products i..e. have them examined by analytical chemists or other relevant experts, to see if there are any possible infringements.

They reverse engineer to discover any secrets, to be copied anyway. That was 50% of a large UK diamond abraisives R&D department. Buy competitor blades, test them. Disolve the segments in acid, to recover the diamond. Friability test. SEM and opitical microscopes. See why they are better and sneakily copy it.
As diamond comes from the cartels, some interesting comparisons to be made, along with batch testing the incoming diamond to see if its up to standard the competitors get.

Similar in IT web design. Director wanting to copy large parts of a competitors design and us having to be sensible about what can be done